Activity vs. Inquiry - Which Truly Promotes Cognitive Rigor?

One of the most helpful tools we educators can use to determine the cognitive rigor of learning experiences is the Cognitive Rigor Matrix or Hess Matrix developed by Karin Hess, Dennis Carlock, Ben Jones, and John Walkup. This matrix aligns the level of thinking students are expected to demonstrate and the depth of knowledge required to answer questions, address problems, accomplish tasks, and analyze texts and topics.

The matrix is intended to be used as a resource and tool for teachers to categorize activities and inquiries based upon their level of complexity.

However, what truly defines and drives the cognitive rigor of a learning experience — the activity or the inquiry?

We can present our students with dozens of questions to answer, problems to address, tasks to accomplish, and texts and topics to analyze. We can provide learning experiences that engage students in discussion, experimentation, analysis, and evaluation of ideas and information. We can also provide students opportunities to develop and demonstrate their talent and thinking by using what they have learned by designing, developing, and doing projects. We can have students role play, re-enact, or participate in simulations — both controlled and uncontrolled.

However, do those learning activities truly promote cognitive rigor?

Consider how math has historically been instructed and assessed. In the past, students proved they learned the mathematical concepts, operations, and procedures they were taught by solving a series of problems presented to them correctly. If they solved a problem correctly, then they proved they knew how to do the math.

With cognitive rigor, knowing what the mathematical facts are and how the mathematical concepts, operations, and procedures can be used to solve problems is half the battle. Students must also know — or think strategically — how and why they can use the math they are learning to:

• Reason abstractly as well as quantitatively by explaining the meaning of quantities, not just how to compute them
• Justify their conclusions, communicate them to others, and respond to the arguments of others
• Communicate precisely to others by using clear definitions in discussion and in their own reasoning

The cognitive actions in these objectives — explain, justify, communicate, respond, state — are not done or shown. They are expressed or told.

Cognitive rigor teaches students to think deeply about the texts and topics they are learning. When they are first introduced to a word or term they do not understand, they should ask what does it mean. When they are first introduced to an idea, subject, or topic, they should inquire how or why. When they are presented with a scenario or situation, they should investigate what is the cause, the connection, the consequence. Once they have developed the factual, conceptual, and procedural knowledge, they should be encouraged to think creatively about what if or think critically about choices, conclusions, and decisions.

That is accomplished by challenging students to show and tell the following:

• What is the knowledge?
• How can the knowledge be used?
• Why can the knowledge be used?
• What else can be done with the knowledge?
• What can YOU do with the knowledge?

The inquiry prompts students to think about what they are learning and encourages them to express and share what they have learned in detail, insightfully, and in their own unique way. The complexity is determined not just by the question but also how deeply or extensively the student responds to the question.

There is one more action cognitive rigor expects students to do — communicate. That is where depth of knowledge comes into play. Depth of knowledge establishes the context in which students are to demonstrate and communicate their learning.

• A DOK-1 experience focuses primarily on knowledge acquisition — demonstrating and communicating what is the knowledge.
• A DOK-2 experience targets knowledge application — demonstrating and communicating how can the knowledge be used to answer questions, address problems, accomplish tasks, and analyze texts and topics.
• A DOK-3 experience engages students in knowledge analysis — demonstrating and communicating why can the knowledge be used to attain and explain answers, conclusions, decisions, outcomes, results, and solutions.
• A DOK-4 experience fosters knowledge augmentation — demonstrating and communicating what else can be done with the knowledge, how else can the knowledge be used in different contexts, and what can you design, develop, and do with the knowledge.

The activity can be used to establish the context in which students are to express and share their depth of knowledge. However, cognitive rigor also expects students to think — hence why it is called rigor. Thinking is prompted and promoted by inquiry and questioning. It stimulates deeper thinking by prompting students to consider, contemplate, or critique. It extends thinking by promoting students to think critically, creatively, and strategically.

Most importantly, inquiry promotes flexibility in thinking. Asking how or why can challenge students to understand, apply, analyze, or evaluate. Hypothetical questions encourage students to develop conditional and contextual knowledge as well as think critically and creatively about possibilities, practicality, and potential. Argumentative questions promote thinking at the deepest levels — specifically, decision-making and problem solving that involves understanding, analyzing, evaluating, synthesizing, and creating.

If you are teaching for compliance — can students apply a concept or procedure to answer a question, address a problem, accomplish a task, or analyze a text or topic correctly — then student learning should focus primarily on the activity.

If you are teaching for cognition — or to promote cognitive rigor by having students think deeply and express and share the depth and extent of their learning — then ask a good question that will set the instructional focus and serve as the assessment for student learning. Have the activity serve as the textual evidence or example that will support the students' response to the good question.

That is what a good question promotes. That is teaching and learning for cognitive rigor.

Erik M. Francis, M.Ed., M.S. is an author, educator, and speaker who specializes in teaching and learning that promotes cognitive rigor and college and career readiness. He is the author of Now That's a Good Question! How to Promote Cognitive Rigor Through Classroom Questioning published by ASCD. He is also the owner of Maverik Education LLC.